[Leica] Leitz IIIc, IIIf, and IIIg Cameras

[sethrosner at nycap.rr.com (Seth Rosner)]

Listen up, all you who have been on this thread. Marc James has a virtual 
encyclopaedia of good information in this post. I take issue with only one 
of his factual statements and one opinion.

The wounded WWII veterans brought into the post-war workforce who formed the 
core of the extraordinarily skilled Leitz factory workers were born between 
1918 and 1925. In the late 60's they were in their very early 50's or 
younger. Retirement and the effect on Leitz' manufacturing skills was not 
felt until the mid-1970's at the earliest, not the later 1960's.

As between IIIc and IIIf, in my view there is no choice. Marc acknowledges 
that immediate post-war materials affected the IIIc's; he is right. No such 
problem with the IIIf's, even the black dials. And Marc, have you ever 
weighed the internal self-timer and flash synchronizer of the IIIf? An 
ounce? And much, much  less weight than the separate add-on devices, APDOO 
self-timer and Kontakt flash units. And much less fuss. IIIf a much better 
choice.

Thanks, Marc, for an otherwise very useful factual report.

Seth


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Marc James Small" <msmall@aya.yale.edu>
To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 6:31 PM
Subject: [Leica] Leitz IIIc, IIIf, and IIIg Cameras


> There are really two camera series here:  the IIIc and IIIf black-dial,
> which share a common shutter mechanism, and the IIIf red-dial and IIIg 
> with
> a redesigned shutter.  The latter shutter is generally regarded as
> marginally better but the differences are minor and of no real consequence
> to the user. The principal distinction is that the latter shutter is
> indexed to a fully geometric shutter-speed sequence, while the earlier
> shutter uses the earlier spread.
>
> There are quality-control issues.  The IIIc was produced, for the most
> part, during times of wartime and postwar shortages, so chrome can be
> spotty and the like, but all of these cameras are quite well-made.  German
> manufacturers were offered a hellacious tax break soon after the
> establishment of the Bundesrepublik in 1949 for the hiring of injured
> veterans;  Leitz took full advantage of this and obtained a most loyal,
> dedicated, and capable workforce.  Most of these guys retired in the later
> 1960's, at which point Leitz quality control becomes a bit spotty.  The
> IIIf and IIIg do not suffer from the material problems which afflict some
> of the IIIc's.
>
> My first Leica was a IIIc and I soon scrounged up a Geiss Kontakt flash
> synchronizer and a Leitz APDOO self-timer, so these provided me the same
> versatility as a IIIf BD/ST.  (Leitz made adapters for almost any need,
> including one to allow accessories designed to fit the LTM's unique
> camera-release thread, such as the APDOO, on the later M cameras with 
> their
> standard internal thread for such accessories.)  I have since acquired a
> IIIf RD/ST and a IIIg and have owned a bunch of other IIIf's over the
> years.  The IIIg is a nice camera and is worth picking up, simply as eBay
> has driven the prices down so far, but, for a user camera, I'd recommend a
> IIIc with Kontakt and APDOO -- after all, why haul the weight of a flash
> synchronizer and self-timer around with you when you don't need them save
> on a very few occasions?
>
> Lenses are a gazillion and most are quite inexpensive -- there is a really
> fine work on non-Leitz LTM lenses which I highly recommend and, for our
> Asian members, there is even a Japanese-language edition available.  The
> best normal lens is the rigid 2/5cm Summicron, but this is a bit dear, so
> you might consider either the collapsible Summicron or the collapsible
> Summitar.  I happen to like both but the Summitar is sweet lens and is
> often under-priced due to the allure of the Summicron.  For once, I will
> suggest aavoiding a Soviet/Post-Soviet Zeiss clone but, in my experience,
> the 2/50 Jupiter-8 is simply too variable in terms of quality-control to
> make it a good bet.  (I have one which is excellent, but I suspect that, 
> of
> the dozen or so that I've owned, only six or seven were up to snuff.)  For
> a faster lens, avoid the Summarit unless you wish to experience a fairly
> steep learning curve, as the lens is rather unforgiving.  The 1.5/50
> Jupiter-3 is generally a superb lens, however, and rarely costs much.
>
> A Leitz IIIc or IIIf can be supplanted with a wide range of rather
> inexpensive SPS lenses -- the 5.6/20 Russar MR-2 and the 6/28 Orion-15,
> both native Soviet designs, and the 2.8/35 Jupiter-12, the 2/85 Jupiter-9,
> and the 4/135 Jupiter-11, all clones of the Jena lenses originally made 
> for
> the Contax RF.  Check out eBay, where these lenses can often be had for a
> relative pittance.
>
> Leitz LTM lenses are good but be wary of one thing:  coatings.  These
> lenses are often listed as having "wipe marks" but this is almost always a
> simple matter of dried-out coatings.  Leitz was prevented from using the
> accepted vacuum-deposit technology by the owner of the patent, Zeiss, 
> until
> that expired in 1958, so the Gnomes of Wetzlar used a drip technique which
> left a moist coating.  This moist coating gradually dries out and the
> residue either blows away or leaves a dried sediment which, under
> magnification, looks like a dried lake bottom.  Fortunately, John Van
> Stelten, and others, will cheerfully clean and recoat the front element 
> for
> around $100 or so.  Sometimes, a dealer who lacks the knowledge will
> discount such a lens as "damaged" and will discount the price 
> substantially.
>
> And you can use a Visoflex to expand your horizons either into macro or
> telephoto work;  I can use my IIIc for macro work with, say, a Mikrotar or
> Photar or Luminar for extreme close-ups or I can hook it up to my Questar
> with a Barlow to get an f/29 2600 or so telephoto.  And an LTM Visoflex II
> or IIa will allow the use of that really utile 3.5/65 Elmar for both macro
> and normal photography.
>
> Some eyeglass wearers have problems with the RF and VF but I do not.  The
> RF is quite precise and the magnification makes it quite accurate.  And
> action photography is a problem for some folks but I have not experienced
> this problem:  I have shot a number of weddings and soccer games and even
> some Jazz Club doings with my IIIc without a problem, but, then, your
> mileage may well vary.  Frame the shot in your mind, anticipate, and do 
> it.
> And, yes, I have shot young kids with my IIIc and without a problem, and
> these were not kids doped on Ritalin or similar mind-altering drugs, just
> normal kids doing normal kid things.
>
> Those who gripe about the bottom loading have an issue real to them, but 
> it
> really is not an issue.  You must trim the film, an issue of a five-second
> recessional with your Swiss Army Knife's scissors, and Bob's your uncle.
> It is, like casting a fly-fishing line, a matter of practice.  Do it 
> thirty
> times and you will wonder what all the fuss is about.
>
> I got into Leica at a time when you could buy for a premium but could
> always sell for a premium and 10%, so, in the end, I have very little
> actual investment in my LTM and M kit, just a lot of buying as cheap as I
> could and selling for as much as I could get, and keeping the best.  But
> eBay has driven the costs down so far -- free enterprise in operation! --
> that cheap deals are now all over the place.
>
> Marc
>
> msmall@aya.yale.edu
> Cha robh b?s fir gun ghr?s fir!
>
> NEW FAX NUMBER:  +540-343-8505
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>